Jordan Peterson had an interesting interview with Cathy Newman from the UK news program Channel 4 News. This talk is interesting, not because of the content per se, but much more so about how he handles this particular news anchor, and her attempts to control the frame. The whole interview is a shit test and Jordan crushes it. And leads us way beyond the little traps she tries to set, to give us a remarkable look at masculinity in action.

A lot of the magic in that interview is in the non-verbals. If you know how to read people, you could watch it with the sound off. The most important interpersonal aspects of the talk could be seen in silent frames of the salient moments. We’ll look at all that below.

Jordan Peterson is a proper Patriarch in this talk. It’s not his powerful eye contact or the way he leans back in “set.” That’s also solid, but sits on the surface of his greater value and what he is doing for Western Culture.

And he is a Patriarch in this instance, because he leads this particular girl out of her own poisonous mindset (if only for a minute), correcting some of her garbage frames as he walks her into the light. And he leads us with a demonstration on how to conduct the dance between the masculine and the feminine, with girls like this one, and on our path as men.

He is an excellent role model. And this talk is a surprisingly great tutorial of solid game… played at the level of a Patriarch.

……………………………….

Going back to the non-verbals, watching how Jordan husbands this woman really inspired me. I was going to do a quick graphic about her facial expressions, but there was too much here for such a light treatment.

My original idea was that I see a lot of similarities in this talk to what goes down in a masterful daygame approach on the street. It was fun for me to look at this interaction in that way.

If this interview was a cold approach on the street, she is certainly not a “Yes Girl.” And yet, many of us have had extraordinary interactions with girls that didn’t necessarily make it easy. Sometimes sets that start out rough turn out to be the juiciest ones.

This is that kind of “set.”

Krauser talks about “giving the girl ‘the rub.'” About how some girls need that, because they crave it, or that’s the only way to get through to them. The interviewer in this piece came after him guns blazing, full “hit piece” style. Her tests are in everything she says to him… but mostly SHE IS the shit test. Can Jordan handle the “wild feminine?”

We can compare her to a hostile, but not necessarily unavailable, daygame girl. That is what I will do here.

Yeah. Cathy Newman is that kind of girl. She is not just a ditsy, dismissive “club chick.” She is an alpha female. She needed the “rub.” And she got it in healthy portions.

As I continue to use the lens of a “pickup” here… it’s not to say that she “wanted” Jordan Peterson’s attention. But girls wants and desires are, in fact, somewhat malleable. Not for most guys, actually. But for masters… girls can go from “no” to “maybe” over the course of an exchange with a strong, masculine man. In this case, Jordan Peterson proves himself to be that kind of man. And he manages to take a girl from full hostility, from the aggressor role, from a full “no”… to an adorable “yes.”

We can look more closely at the non-verbals below. And that is good work in itself.

But the bigger deal here, and in game in a more general sense, is about being a solid man.

The talk starts out, in terms of content, with Jordan Peterson talking about how men need to “grow the hell up.” To “clean your room” is at the center of Jordan’s basic lessons for “getting yourself sorted.” But he goes way beyond “conscientiousness” into a level of easy confidence that only really solid inner game can give you.

Jordan Peterson is a badass. And a proper man. There is more here than “tricks” and “techniques.” This is what Deida might call “Third Stage” masculinity in action.

Watch how he handles this girl… and watch how his solidity as a man, relieves her of the need to “be the man.” How that process makes her joyful… and (I would argue) turns her on.

I have no doubt, that if Jordan Peterson wanted to (if he had some access to this woman), he could fuck her. Not because he is “sneaky” and has some perfect opener, but because he is an oak of a man. He is a proper Patriarch. That is attractive. And he is a great role model for us all in this talk.

……………………………….

Check this out:

I’m going to jump into my “daygame approach” analogy, and say that this ^ is him, sizing her up in pre-approach.

She is the target. He is light and carefree about it. He has no fear of “a cute little girl.” He is a serious guy, he has tremendous value on so many levels… but there’s a bit of a smirk here, as he is ready to play.

Maybe he can tell by her walk she’ll be a “firecracker.” There is concentration in his eyes as he goes to what Krauser would call “Code Red,” gearing up for the approach, but he’s already at ease. He has already proven himself… to himself. And compared to that level of work, charming her will be no great feat or challenge.

Here ^ he opens. And he makes a playful face. Sort of acknowledging this is man-to-woman, and using a bit of humor to begin to disarm her.

The dance has begun.

We see her wrinkle her forehead in a sort of “what the fuck?” look.

She has seen men try this before. I can imagine her as the bitchy sorority type… maybe even a leader of those types of girls. This is the girl at the club that has already been hit on six times in the last hour, and she’s cock-blocked several other guys as they have made ill-suited passes as her brood of hens. She is a formidable force packed into a skirt, and she is very aware of her value.

As the set gets going she is in full disapproval ^. A somewhat bored, but a cold “how dare you” forming on her face. Her sense of her own worth is through the roof, so she almost sneers at him. It’s early in the set, but this doesn’t look like “maybe.” This would melt most guys… which is sport for a girl like this one. She does this all the time.

Here ^ we have a wider shot. And lets imagine that Jordan has spit a few lines of game, and she is batting those lines back at him. Maybe giving him some short answers. Or talking about how “she has a busy day and lots do to” in a dismissive, self-important tone.

And that is cool, actually. These girls don’t owe us anything, and as many men in our space have said, it’s our job to carry the burden of the conversation early on. At this point, we are the “sellers,” and she is the “buyer,” so the attractiveness of the pitch is entirely up to us to convey. That’s fair.

If a girl wants to give me a bitchy attitude on a cold approach, that is totally legit. Part of the game. In this case, Cathy was beyond a little “bitchy” in the way she treats JBP. But he shows that even then, there can be real opportunities for men with the talent and the stones to penetrate the world of a girl like this one.

Here ^ she is giving him what we in daygame call “the Russian Minute.” Let’s imagine that Jordan is telling her why he stopped her. Maybe talking about her walk. Or the brilliant contrast of her “elegance” and her “seriousness.”

“I like it,” he might say, with a cocky look.

It is about this point that she is beginning to take him seriously. She has properly stopped. It’s not that she likes him (because at this point in the interview, she does not). But she is digging in, and pulling out her big guns for a proper firefight. There is no doubt in her mind she can handle this guy. Who does he think he is? She’s ready to show him a girl like her can put a simple daygamer in his place…

And that over-confidence on her part, is also an opportunity. She could have walked away, which would have been fine, but she did not. And Jordan has the time to set the hook.

He knows he has room to work here ^, and he is gaining ground in the interaction. You can see he is far enough into her world that he can start to break rapport a little. That smirk is gone, for the moment. He is showing that he is multidimensional. And that he is strong. No giggles. No “uptalk.” No beta tells. She is not impressed, but he is already kicking ass.

All of this is having an effect on her, but it takes some time to gel.

She has no idea she is in the presence of a “dangerous man.” Not yet. And that is beautiful to me. I love it. Having watched this video a few times to produce this piece… I know this is where she really lost the game. If she wanted to “guard her womb,” this was the time for her get out of Dodge.

But she doesn’t. And Jordan can progress with the seduction.

Gun’s blazing ^. There is no respect in that look. She’s hostile and careless. She is a cunt.

She is totally unfair to him for the first 1/2 of the talk, unprofessionally so. Beyond being combative, she tries to put words in his mouth, twists almost everything he says as he says it, doggedly trying to trap him… but he remains civil, smart, even humorous.

I couldn’t have done that. Jordan is a better man than me (than most of us), and he is non-reactive and goes where he wants. That is putting yourself in the center of your world… not spinning in orbit around some wild girl throwing a tantrum. This is a clinic in how to be a proper man in a tough situation.

And while I dislike her for who she shows herself to be, I recognize that this is still a type of FEMININE energy… the destructive kind. “Kali,” as Jordan might say. Both in her style of communication and in the position she tries to advance. This is woman as hurricane. And she’s fierce. And the dance here goes on at multiple levels of reality.

While I agree that this is a type of feminine, she is also displaying many masculine traits. That is a big theme of both the text and the subtext of the talk.

Jordan is beyond masterful, as he corrals her at both levels. He provides the structure for her chaos, and that on its own is an incredible way to understand the potential of masculinity. In his lectures, Jordan talks about these themes at a level I can barely begin to comprehend. But what really blows me away is to watch him enact those themes, here, in real time. To tame the tiger under the pressure of the public eye (like a street approach). And to do it with such style.

At this point in the talk, she is all hot and bothered about the wage gap myth (which, to her credit, she cites as only 9% in the UK, that is more fair than any number I have ever heard from a woman like her). And Jordan is talking about how this is a complex issue, with many factors, one of them being:

JBP: “Women are more agreeable than men.”

Which is ironic given the tone of her interview style and her complete lack of charm. And it gets more ironic in a minute… but for now she responds:

CATHY: “Some women are not more agreeable than men.”

And he agrees with that, because it’s true and of course Jordan is on the side of truth. This is an important part of understanding why JBP is so important in the culture. He is not a partisan mercenary, bickering and pushing disingenuous arguments. He is a grown up, and a man of his word. He is principle-based. A man we can trust.

And now he gets serious with her:

It’s still early, but this ^ may be the turning point of the interaction. He crushes her here, and it serves her and the interaction incredibly well. His strength, is an act of service, and you’ll see how this all plays out as the conversation continues. Jordan can talk about the integration of the light and the shadow. And he lets some of his own fierceness comes through here.

In response to her comment above he says:

JBP: “Yes, that’s true. And some women get paid more than men.”

He says that with an edge to his voice. And you can see his face in that shot.

She had been complaining about generalities and had been citing exceptions, and here he turns that back on her. And this moment is maybe the only time JBP rises up on her. He gets a bit hot here, and I think it’s well timed. I deeply admire the coolness in which he meets the unwarranted attitude from this girl, but this was a time to show his teeth a bit, and he does. And it has an impact on her.

This is actually HOOK POINT, as I see it. It was that move, that bit of strength, that got him solidly into the set. She really is that difficult. And it took this much “art” for her to begin to be real, to begin to have a more honest conversation.

And he’s back to being at ease.

In the last frame he showed his teeth, but he doesn’t need to over-do it. I think he knows he’s already won the war. He is six moves ahead of her, and that’s where that big smiles comes from. He’s still on stage, but he’s having a good time with it now.

Goddamn, I love this guy.

With the extra space he has now, he can begin to “stretch out.” I think there is something fatherly in his look here. He’s not condescending or mean, but he knows that he is in a class above this girl. He doesn’t need to fight, ruthlessly, like a cornered rat. He can relax and begin to show more value. Continue into his “mastery topics” (a great phrase I know from the LoveSystems crew)… not “saying” he has value with obvious DHV stories, but actually demonstrating value, on the spot.

He is teaching her here. The whole time. It just takes her a minute to get it. And Jordan has such good game, he creates time to give her that good experience. He creates the space she needs for his value to sink into the obstinate, thickheaded game she is trying to play.

You can see her, in fits and starts, begin to accept his reality, to slowly buy into his frame. This woman is a hammer made of ice. But she begins to melt… and to trust him. Good men can do that, even for women that barely deserve that kind of gift.

See ^, she softened. Look at those previous frames. No way you would expect a girl like this to suddenly lean back a bit. He has brought her to this moment.

Notice how she is beginning to look a bit pretty. This girl is not my type… but this is the first time I can see the beautiful side of femininity in her. And it is no coincidence that this is happening…

Proper masculinity creates the space for femininity to bloom. As David Deida might say, he is “fucking her open.” This is what penetration looks like. You’re seeing it right before your eyes.

Around 12 minutes in, he has started to wear her down… she is softening.

CATHY: “What do you mean by that?”

She is almost curious now… you can hear it in her voice (13:34). He has slowed her down.

He continues to educate her, going into the depth and range of his personal vault of knowledge. And she is letting him lecture her at this point… a little bit. Here and there. At 14:24, she pauses, and thinks, and takes a breath… she is already done… she is his… but she doesn’t know it yet.

Now ^ here, in a last ditch effort for her to retain her frame, she doubles down. That bit of sweetness is gone. This is her, as ugly as in any other part of the talk.

……………………………….

And it’s no coincidence that she is raging about “The Patriarchy” in these frames. That narrative brings out the ugliness of women. She has no fucking idea what that concept means. Most folks in the current culture do not.

This interaction has endless levels of irony, but this is the center of it for me:

She thinks “the evil nature of men” is holding women back. She is playing the bullshit Marxist power game, or trying to, the whole time. More of the victim and oppressor frame. She wants to “tear down” all that “the bad men” have done to the world, and replace it with what? With her chaotic, nastiness? With her personal style of viciousness? She is quite an example.

And she is “miserable” in these moments… the ones where she is leading. Fierce, but far from happy. We’ll see later what her potential for joy is, when she surrenders to a solid man… and a better plan.

Cathy Newman is a very smart woman. In another context, I would easily praise her, as her strength, her fortitude, and her smarts are impossible to miss. If you want the job done, hiring a woman like this is not a bad idea… essentially because she is so masculine.

And with that said, that woman has no idea what she really wants. I’m not saying she can’t order herself a latte, I’m talking about the bigger picture. And the arch of society. The talk itself proves it.

Rewind back to the beginning of the talk. Where Jordan makes the claim that relationships with weak men are making woman miserable. That is a kind of truth.

I would say that women are miserable in the world view that Cathy Newman exemplifies. That is why she doesn’t know what she wants. You’ll see what she really wants at the end of this post.

This worldview makes women think this pointed, edgy, bitch-on-wheels perspective is the way to live their lives (and to raise their daughters). Cathy demonstrates with her tone and her childish attacking that she thinks this is her job, as a “modern woman.” Of course that flavor of woman is graceless and completely repulsive.

But who gives a shit about all that. I’m sick of that conversation. We, as men in this community spend way too much time in the “terms of the debate” as set by that view of the culture.

The question is always this: What do we want?

That is a very difficult question to answer. And Jordan Peterson is maybe the best source I know that can help you begin to explore that question for yourself. Politics is a mere fraction of his many specialties.

Who cares about what does or does not “make women miserable.” Women come later in our personal considerations. They are a subset of the larger plan, or we are on the wrong path.

This is about us. We are the center of our world. Where are we going? What do we want?

And… when we get there… the women we bring with us… the women we lead into the light… will shake off the misery of their own movements, and be happy. Again. Like women have always been… when they were around properly strong and able men that own their responsibility. That “provide the container.” That lead.

“I have been talking non-stop about personal responsibility, and about if you want to change the world you should bloody well get your act together and stop whining and sniveling about how horrible everything is and how people owe you more rights and more privileges.”
— Jordan Peterson

Men of game get this, at one level at least. We’re not the MGTOW cultural run-aways, whining about “Muh Hypergamy” and forever throwing up our hands at how “hard it is.” About some kind of “imperative” other than our own. What a fucking waste of time. I’ll leave it to Chicken Little to babysit that conversation.

We know that to bang YHT we need to “sort ourselves out.” We need to “grow up,” as JBP says in this talk. And if we stay on the path, we do grow up. Game turns men into gold.

As daygamers, we “clean our room” (in both the outer/inner game sense), we get as ready as we can be at this moment in our lives, and we hit the street. And we bring that sense of our own power as men to the sidewalk. We make offers to pretty girls. And they don’t always accept our gifts, and that’s okay. But when they do, magic happens.

We lead them into safety, comfort, and rich interactions. And they add the sunshine of their femininity to our lives. And become the muse to our purpose as men. First we use masculine energy to bring them into order, inside the protection of the walls of our castle. And then their own light can shine. The color and the music of life. And they make our castles places we want to live.

“It’s a call to proper being. It’s a call to heroic being. It’s a call for people to adopt their individual responsibility and to straighten themselves out. And to find out what they could be like if they took on the burdens of existence like respectable, well educated, articulate, powerful people. That’s to the benefit of everyone. That is where the responsibility lies.”
— Jordan Peterson

This is the sound of Patriarchy. And I am inspired.

Jordan is practicing what he preaches in this talk. And in the work he is doing in the larger culture. He can lead you to more of this kind of vision.

But, for now, let’s get back to our little pussy cat and see how this wraps up.

……………………………….

As we left off, he had pierced her armor (amour?), and she was now scrambling to get back on her “go girl” horse so she ride roughshod over the world he was beginning to show her. She is complaining about a lack of opportunities for women, falsely suggesting that Jordan thinks it’s hopeless that women will “ever get there,” and then he says:

JBP: “Look at your situation… You’re hardly unsuccessful.”

This is Jordan cleaning up her frame. He goes from her “focus on groups” (“women”) that the Marxist simpletons rattle on about, and he points to her, as an example of “the role of the individual.” This is a major split in conservative/capitalist versus leftist/socialist thinking. And he makes it personal for her.

And as she is as solipsistic as most of the fairer sex, this creates a quandary for her. Does she take pride in her own accomplishments and her level of personal power? Or does she stick to the party line?

He has her pinned to the mattress. And she is just figuring it out.

This isn’t a frame battle of bullshit and sophistry. Again, Jordan is artful but there are zero “dirty tricks” here. Jordan is exposing her to the truth. He is red pilling this girl. It’s fascinating to watch. He does it over and over.

Most of the reaction to this video is at that level. And that’s good stuff, but again… there is more to see.

She continues to flipflop back and forth. It’s part of the “shit test” of the double bind (classic female manipulation) that she offers him. It’s intellectually dishonest bullshit. She tries to play both cards. Flaunting her strength and her pride in her INDIVIDUAL success (“I’ve worked quite hard”). And wanting to hold up her BS narrative about how all the womens can’t make it past the barriers of the boys club.

And he gives her another smile.

CATHY: “You’ve just said I’ve fought to get where I’ve got. What does that make me… a man, or something?”

She is almost confused.

Now we arrive at the climax of the interaction. He is about to break her across his knee, and he’s terribly playful and gracious about it. He is “boxing” with her like he might with a child. Coaxing her out of her sourness. And it works…

JBP: “Yeah… To some degree. I suspect you’re not very agreeable.”

With ^ yet another smile.

A lot of his power with her is that he makes the whole thing personal. It appeals to her conceit, that is true. But it also cuts through the haze and wakes her up… it’s not theoretical for her anymore when he does this. Well done.

CATHY: “So that’s the thing, successful women…”

And she tries to keep going but…

CATHY: *laughs*
CATHY: “I’m not very agreeable.”

And she laughs some more.

And he laughs.

JBP: “I’ve noticed that, actually… In this conversation.”

Now they are flirting. She is starting to fall in love. She is the “hot bitch” and he is taking her. It’s glorious.

She is also beginning to realize that her bullshit wagon has almost run out of gas.

Look at the look in her face here above… she is searching for something.

If I wanted to be mean, I could say “desperately searching,” but I’d be wrong. She’s not desperate. Maybe for the first time in this talk she’s not desperate at all.

She’s out of gas, but you can see in her smile that she likes where she has landed. Like a horse spinning around a post on a tether… she tuckered herself, pulling against the strength that is Jordan Peterson. And the exercise has calmed her down. She has found peace, despite herself, through the skill of her handler.

Look at her body language here ^. Compare this to the earlier wide shot above. You have to cherry pick a bit to find her at her best, but this is one of those moments. She almost looks fun in that shot.

“It’s just like horses, you gotta break ’em. In other words, you gotta break the girl, and tame her. Then you can be nice, and do nice stuff.”
— Paul Janka

That is a quote from my last piece about Janka and LMR. It’s a bold and insightful remark. In the original talk I sampled it from, he even makes a comment that “this is not PC,” and it isn’t. This is a conversation for grown men… I don’t expect everyone to get it. This whole talk is a deconstruction of the weakness of that PC worldview… and the reality of what her life would be like if she could outgrow this kind of thinking. Of what our culture could be like (even at the individual level), if we shunned the current trends.

More so than in my last piece, we can see here what Paul means. Jordan has her now. She is just about broken. And look… the “nice stuff” is starting to come through. We may feel shy at the idea of breaking the women we love (or could love), but the evidence is right there in front of your eyes for men that are ready to see. This is a gift he has given her.

Look… she’s happy. Jordan is making this woman happy. This level of skill is what woman want. This is a kind of responsibility we can take on that can change the personal kingdoms we live in as men. This is proof of that level of potential.

But we’re not done yet.

Presumably out of (bad) habit, she continues trying to harangue him. She tries wandering into the conversation about transgender pronouns. She is still trying to reframe his position at this point, to muddy his truth in bad-mannered rhetorical cuntiness, but her efforts are increasingly anemic. She is just teeing him up for more victories, enabling him to further showcase his skill.

CATHY: “Why should your right to freedom of speech trump a trans-persons right not to be offended?”
JBP: “Look at the conversation we’re having right now. You’re certainly willing to risk offending me in the pursuit of truth. Why should you have the right to so that?”
JBP: “It’s been rather uncomfortable.”

Again he makes it personal. And she responds to that each time.

And see her offer him that A/B choice trap in the question?

Of, A.) “his right does trump trans rights” (which presumably makes him a bastard), or B.) to try to escape her venom in retreat (which makes him look weak in capitulation to her insinuation). More double bind tactics. “Do I look fat in these jeans?” Classic female psychology. Classic shit tests.

And he solves that (like great men do), by inventing a third choice (judo), which in this case is C.) to expose her own willingness to “push the boundaries” of others. By inventing a “third option” he proves he is immune to her technique… and he also wins her respect. Most men cannot do either. Another shit test passed.

And he says it’s been “uncomfortable,” but look at him here. He’s just “running game” on an another appreciative girl. The primary shit test was passed long ago. This is basically foreplay at this point.

So he encourages her about how she is “digging a bit.” He tells her, “more power to you.” This is like a Lion playing with a cub. He is completely at ease versus her sweaty seriousness.

And he smiles once more.

And that comment is like her being tied to the bedposts.

She has given a champion level “nasty women” performance… but she can’t keep it up. She is starting to forget her lines. She is not used to these kinds of moments. And she is stymied. Her, tongue-tied by a man at the top of a dominance hierarchy.

CATHY: “I’m just trying to work that out…”

She sighs. She’s got nothing. She’s done.

And she’s broken. On the sidewalk TV. In front of everyone.

JBP: “Ha… Got you.”

Fucking beautiful. It’s over. And he’s merciful and graceful about it, of course.

……………………………….

And this breakdown breakthrough is interesting to me, in that this is the kind of conversation that might happen between a father and a rebellious teenage BOY (if the boy was lucky, and not completely rotten). Where he thinks “he knows it all,” and has outgrown his need for Dad. But there, in some kind of crisis, he tries to resists the wisdom the Patriarch has to offer… but in a moment of openness and sincerity, he realizes Dad is right. Good for him. Smart kid.

That is what she does here (perhaps she is not completely rotten either?). The comparison to a teenage boy is fitting (and I’ve never heard that analogy for this type of woman before). “Teenager” like the Social Justice Warriors, mostly dumb naïve headstrong college brats, not actually worldly enough to know what they are talking about. And “Boy,” in this case, as she is so masculine.

A feminine girl wouldn’t have come on this way at all. And she wouldn’t have taken this long to respond to strength. This is Cathy’s adolescent masculinity, finally beaten. Jordan is helping to “straighten her out.”

“It is often wise to consider women to be like children.”
–Krauser, from Daygame Infinite

Krauser has made that point many times. Earlier on my path I was uncomfortable with that line. Now I am not.

I could soften it… and say it’s often wise to consider most men to be like children, as well. Many men, certainly. Maybe most of them (if a different style of “child”). Most folks are “like children” versus the understanding of real Patriarchs. Myself included… some of the time.

One of the errors of the current worldview is the idea that all men are part of proper, real Patriarchy (again, Patriarchy as “the noble heritage of men that lead”). I even hear men say that in the Manosphere. That is a serious misconception. Patriarch means “head of a tribe” That is not “most men.” In fact, that means only a few men in a given tribe. Just like most men are not Alpha (or influential Sigmas), most men are not Patriarchs. Period.

I like an alternate translation of that line, that is to say that “the Patriarch must looks after those in his care.” In that way, everyone under his arm is “like a child.” Think of a CEO. Or the coach of a football team.

When we consider the emotional nature of women, I think that’s even more true. That is getting closer to the truth for me.

Krauser is a Patriarch, he leads so many of us. And Jordan Peterson is a Patriarch, but on a much more grand scale. I want to be a Patriarch in the realms where I have influence. I take that responsibility seriously.

This ^ is part of my path as a man. And part of the rewards of a job well done in this regard will be… “younger, hotter, tighter.”

……………………………….

CATHY: “You have got me. You have got me.”

She is still smiling and laughing as she does this confession. This is her being fair. And I like her in this moment.

And the relief starts to set in for her. That look of relief and real ease is important. It’s a sign of the cost of all the bullshit on these women’s psychologies. There is real relief to be free of the burden of trying to be “men in pantsuits” and of having to try to “lean in” all the time.

The game is finally over. Her guard comes down. Because the illusion that she IS Dad is now over for her. Because Dad is actually there, and she has shit tested him to death, and he more than passed. In fact, he has lead her into the light. A place she couldn’t find on her own. Good Dads are like that.

This woman is likely naturally alpha. And has elements of a proper Matriarch, and I respect that too. But she is also poisoned by the political philosophy she spews in this talk. And poisons others that take her seriously. You can see the foul nature in the tactics she tries to use, there is little honor in her chosen game. And you can see Jordan’s truth in that he doesn’t retaliate with those same tactics. Higher level game from that guy. Higher ground, in every sense.

It’s very hard to get her to settle down. I think we can safely assume her husband is a beta, and suffers under her thumb. I personally don’t care about that guy. Men like that make their own beds. I don’t like Cathy very much, but I am more interested in her, and how she suffers from a lack of masculine leadership in her life. How so many of the women around us suffer when we abdicate our responsibility, fooling ourselves that we’re more “conscious” and that we might all be happier in some equalist paradise that we can’t seem to find (and has never existed).

Men do need to grow the hell up. And we should do it for us. It is exactly how Jordan starts the talk. But it took him a minute to get his boots on and fucking prove it to her. To show it to all of us.

But now it’s done. And you can see her finally relaxing into her spot in the pack… relaxing into the container he provides for her. She is a dominant female. But that doesn’t actually mean she wants to lead. Most folks don’t.

It’s clear who the leader is here. With the women in your life, is it clear who is at the helm? Not always for me… but more and more often as I grow up and get serious about my role and my responsibly. That is what I tried to do as the lovely Miss Thick broke it off with me. Even then, I tried to be the container. For her. And for me.

JBP: “It’s about time.”
CATHY: “It took a while, it took a while.”

And she laughs.

And she’s pretty all of a sudden. The witch has been transformed into something cute. And that was no accident.

Ahhhh… that look on her face ^. Look how pretty she is now. Do you like to see girls at their prettiest? I do. I want to give women that experience.

It’s a miracle of masculinity, what we’ve seen here. It’s taken me a day or so to write this piece, and people are all over the talk, in appreciation of its “tussle-like” qualities. They love the win that Jordan Peterson does for us all on the sane side of the Marxist invasion. He has beat back the intellectual savages once again. And I agree to all that. It’s great.

But the demo in masculinity is much more important. I, personally, can offer effective intellectual battle in this area sometimes. But I can’t do it with the masculine gravity that Jordan shows us here. That’s what I have my eye on.

What a moment. That is what this is really all about.

I made the claim earlier, that I think Jordan could fuck this girl, if he wanted to. And I say that in a theoretical sense, with no disrespect to Cathy or her (likely beta and beat-down) husband. Nor any disrespect to Jordan’s family. This is only a theoretical point.

With that said, notice the look in his eyes in the pic above. What is the comment about that famous seducers “underlook?” I’m sure Sundance would know the source. Jordan has the look here.

He’s all warmed up. He has a foundation in truth. He is a solid guy, and carries his share of responsibility. He obviously has a way with girls. And he could slay pussy from that position. Of course he could. I want to follow him on that path.

Here ^ she drifts back to her toughness a tiny bit. This woman is not very feminine, so it would take a tremendous effort to hold her in the feminine pose. Her eyebrows are clue for me… they’re flat… none of the arch of classic feminine physiology.

But here… she is a serious school girl. She is rapt in attention of the professor.

He lectures a bit more for the rest of the talk. And I bet it is a kind of paradise for this woman.

A rare moment to be in the presence of a man that has forced her eyes open, and allowed a natural respect for him to bubble up. I bet she almost never feels this way… as most of the men around her are boot-licking pussies. But tonight, she has Daddy all to herself. And she is glowing with it. She is a happy little girl.

That’s awesome. And in a sexual sense, that’s hot.

This ^ is admiration. This is love.

You’ve come a long way, baby.

If he were to stand a little too close to her at this point…. maybe with no one else watching… and reach his hand up the back of her neck, across her pale, creamy skin, into the roots of her hair…

Full tingles. She’d be wetter than she’s been in years.

Of course he could fuck her.

And this ^ is surrender.

Night and day difference from where she started out. And the difference is his masculine gift to the girl in her.

Just look at how happy he’s made her. God knows she never in a million years expected this to happen when she prepared for this interview.

Look at how proper masculinity… done via a true artist, a man of real mettle… look at how the “burning consciousness” of masculinity makes the feminine happy. He has “fucked her open to God”, indeed.

Viva Jordan Peterson.

May we all find some time under his arm and his tutelage (through the gift of YouTube). May we all be inspired. He is a conduit of wisdom much older than himself. He is offering us access to the blood of Patriarchs. This has been a view into ageless masculinity, as demonstrated in what otherwise might be another episode of talking heads in the culture war.

May we step into the shoes we were born to fill. May we find good experiences as men, on the street… and in all we do on our path. May we give the girls good experiences, as they earn a place in our world, and we lead them toward the light.

Yeah that was beautiful and masterful. Your whole read is on point also.

Peterson is incarnating the archetype – so much more than about a year ago. I assume it’s the exposition and actually being at the top of his mountain. He has the intellect AND the frame now. He’s likely the only male role model out there at the moment.

Ah – when she starting double down, she peaked in hostility putting words in his mouth, and he replied by laughing and calling it “silly”. That is a boundary, delivered with extreme grace. The argument is nonsense and dishonest so he doesn’t engage on it, she gets a label for it, which she doesn’t like, so she backs off. That was also when she had to switch the subjects, she found a wall and wasn’t going to be able to push further.

>> Peterson is incarnating the archetype – so much more than about a year ago. I assume it’s the exposition and actually being at the top of his mountain. He has the intellect AND the frame now. He’s likely the only male role model out there at the moment.

Yeah. When I first heard him talk, he almost made be anxious, as he was uncentered and shrill. So smart, but too “wound up” to be a proper leader.

He is still a bit “odd,” but I am on board.

He is TOP GUY. And it is very much like you teach… that being at the top of a hierarchy up-cycles the correct mindsets/frame/behaviors in a man. +1 Yohami Game.

I fvcking love JP. Total bro crush. He was playing GO while she was trying to sneak a Thimble across Go To Jail when she had been on Water Works and rolled snake eyes….in the immortal words of Dave Chapelle, “GOT YA BITCH!” [honk, honk]

In her defense she was set-up to fail, and she knew it. Here is likely the deepest thinker about masculinity on the planet AND he also has the data to back it up being a “clinical psychologist” and all (loved that response to her frame challenge. More thoughts below). He has committed his life to this. She maybe had 10 – 15 hours to think about it if she really prioritized it.

I’m less concerned about who wins an election (Trump vs Hilary), a debate (JP vs Newman) or a seduction (me vs her) than I am with how they did it and whether they played the game to maximize their probability of winning. What can I learn? Did I lose? Ok. Wash, rinse, repeat until the odds are in your favor.

She gave herself the highest possible probability of “winning” the debate by trying to bait him. Not only did he not bite, he flipped the script and painted her into a corner using her own paint and brush – judo – as Nash points out. Rope-a-dope.

If Cathy had a 1:20 chance of winning this debate her strategy of strawmans and ad hominem attacks (the signal she had tossed in the towel) maybe got it down to 1:17 or something. Game recognize game. Even if she had thought about it for a year…maybe she get’s it down to 1:11 or something – the result is probably the same – but maybe she isn’t seduced on national TV ;)

Here’s what I learned from the interview and our incisive observer Nash:

– When challenged with a Moral frame, it pays to have Authority frame. The outward manifestation of that is downward inflection of voice, open body language, and playfulness (among the data/certainty in your position). This doesn’t mean you’re an Authority, but all Authority frames possess this.

IF you want to continue the game let her get 1 small win for every 2 of your major victories. JP concedes when necessary – this is his gracefulness – but it’s because he knows the data (authority). I’m sure he could’ve smashed it with confounding variables or other ideas if he wanted. CH has this idea in his Poon Commandments and has been demonstrated in rats playing. If you go 3 for 3 no body wants to continue the game.

– When faced with double bind of A or B go with C, but the trick with C is that it’s the broader context or bigger picture. Take a metaphorical step higher and then reframe to suit your agenda. Only go into the details when it’s from an Authority frame.

Some references that are useful for this interview

Fader’s LS Frame talk

33 Strategies of War by Robert Greene:
– Strategy 20 Maneuver Them into Weakness: Ripening for the Sickle (about creating dilemmas A or B are both bad)
– Strategy 25 Occupy the Moral High Ground: Righteousness (Moral Frame)
– Strategy 28 Give Your Rival Enough Rope to Hang Themselves: One-Upmanship (rope a dope)

48 Laws of Power:
– Law 19 Know Who You are Dealing With (find out which frame they are going to use)
– Law 31 Control the Options (A or B)
– Law 33 Discover each Man’s Thumbscrew
– Law 34 Be Royal: Act like a King to be Treated like a King

>> When challenged with a Moral frame, it pays to have Authority frame. The outward manifestation of that is downward inflection of voice, open body language, and playfulness

I wasn’t sure about this… but when you get into the non-verbals you have me .

Moral frame is often about emotion, it can be irrational (religious/moral). And emotion is tough to debate. But your note cut through the emotion. It’s non-verbally authoritative… it’s non-reactive. That defeats emotion.

…

Maybe I missed that this was supposed to be “debate.” I don’t think it was. I think it’s supposed to be “new,” and an “interview.” But she comes loaded with assumptions, and that’s what it comes off this way.

I don’t think she thought she would have any trouble making him look like a “mean guy.” Like a caveman that “hates women/trans.” And I think she is shocked as she get’s pulling into his reality… intellectually and beyond.

If you read Strategy 25 it’s basically the playbook on handling, and I quote from the book, “moral warriors”.

JP elected to attack the Moral Frame with the Authority frame, and that makes sense because there’s an underlying agenda – JP’s new book. His job was to verbal judo into her hanging herself, because of the hidden agenda.

This isn’t the best way to beat the post-modernism movement though, and he knows it. He has expressed the best way in other lectures/videos. This was to get as many people to dip their toe into the JP waters as possible. Then they can start to peer down the rabbit hole…

Absolutely masterful, strategic and powerful given his agenda, the terrain, and the counterpart. I give him an A+.

She is a very self-centered girl. That is why the moments when he gets to her are NOT logic, but when he gives her a psychological SPLIT between her SELF PRIDE and the party line. She can’t resist her own self-love… and that’s what beats her.

Both big moments are ^ that.

She falls “in love”, but she’s never a “nice” girl. Some folks said she flirts with him (Jordan said it, actually), but I don’t see that.

I see her submit… i see her enjoy herself… because she is so into the experience he gives her. It’s about the experience she is feeling in those moments, not about him.

She is a greedy, self centered bitch… but he could have fucked her at that point:

Because he used her ego to seduce her.

……………

>> I see her submit… i see her enjoy herself… because she is so into the experience he gives her.
— Me

BTW… this, helps explain for me why girls will let us seduce them, obviously have a very good time, maybe having squirting orgasms, and all that, and then… disappear.

It still surprises me, but it happens a lot in the “fast sex” world.

This goes back to the SOLIPSISM argument… the extreme self-centered nature… the complete inability to see beyond their personal bubble.

NAWALT, but many are, and most to some degree… bless their little hearts, smooth asses, and tender necks.

Those girls are basically a “No.” Nothing is good enough for them. Princess X1000.

And then… we run really good game.

And they, for completely selfish reasons, dig it. It’s not actually respect (not at all), it’s ONLY psychological pleasure (and/or physical pleasure). So they show signs they are into THE EXPERIENCE. They cannot be into us, because that would mean they could see beyond themselves… and they cannot.

So we have a good time. Maybe she sleeps over, and is still cool. Sleeps close. Is tender, even. You see “doggy dinner bowl” eyes, all that. But none of that is about us… it only about the experience.

This is them, looking in the mirror, and loving the feeling they get.

We are, as Pook might say, “dildos” for her. Not “social didldo” (that give her attn/validation), but “experience dildos” that give her psychological/physical pleasure.

As long as I’m having a good time, I am fine with that. Because it serves me. This is about us, not the silly girls. And I like that I can get what I want, even if it’s very short term, and with self-absorbed princesses. I like the exploration. And the sex.

And sometimes… when she DISAPPEARS afterward… it’s because we are outside of her bubble, and she can’t feel us, she can’t feel the pleasure we gave her at the time… so we do not exist.

A good explanation of what might be going on. I would say that anyone that wants to learn ‘game’ from this situation should be clear on a couple of things.

1. It was not his intent to cause any attraction, if there was any. It’s a byproduct of his certainty in his experience and his leadership.

2. To an extent he acts subservient during this interview in that he doesn’t want to break the meta frame. “We’re both agreeing to hold an interview in which one person asks the other person questions or interrogates them”. If he game skills and his intentions were amorous he would flip the script. “How about I see if you measure up to my standards?”

If you’re in a bar and a girl you have approached acts in this way you can battle her, and so accept her frame or you can ignore her questions and her frame and set your own frame.

3. He smiles and laughs in a slightly subservient way. It’s not 100% amused mastery, there is a tinge of fake or real subservience. I have no doubt he is capable of being dominant. As you pointed out he flashes some stern faces and voice tone, but he still doesn’t want to break the “interview” frame too much. He pushes against it slightly.

If I were in his shoes and I wanted to turn on my ‘game’ I would break the interview frame and start interrogating her and my laughs and smiles would be reserved as rewards for her compliance.

I’m not saying that you have to approach interactions with women like a dominant gorilla, but the way Jordan approaches the conversation is still quite safe and respectful compared to how I ‘game’.

SIDE NOTE: I was thinking of a quote from you, I believe, about what a shit test is, when I wrote this. Something you said was more zeroed-in that how guys usually talk about… so it’s been on my mind. I think you mentioned it on Riv’s blog recently… but I didn’t want to spend the time to track it down… but it caught my attn.

Totally agree. It was a side-effect of the solidity of his game, his masculinity, the pleasure a Patriarch can give those around him.

>> To an extent he acts subservient during this interview
>> He smiles and laughs in a slightly subservient way

I like your meta comments. But I never see him subservient. He is nice (and not in an attractive way, I agree). And his “giggle frame” is not weakness, but him avoiding turning it into blatant hostility. Those moments are infrequent, but I see them.

Going totally direct with this girl would have been “tussle.” It wouldn’t have helped him. He was wise to avoid her in that way.

He used to be much more shrill and anxiety inducing. His first Joe Rogan podcast (which is how I learned of him), made me think he was smart, but too “wound up.” He is not wound up here. And that “softness” isn’t retreat, but I think an effort to counter-balance his own tendency to scare folks off.

He’s getting better at “PR.” Not perfect yet, but he’s improving… I need help in that area as well.

>> his intentions were amorous he would flip the script. “How about I see if you measure up to my standards?”

Hmmm.

If this took place in a bar… he would need to start the interaction. So in that way, he would have to lean fwd into her.

But if, she happen to make some bitchy remark while ordering a drink, he could do exactly what he did here… Lean back and parry her thrusts… and she’d fuck him.

She would “bring out the guns” and the bullets would bounce off him, and he’d “lecture” and beat her, and she’d submit… and he could say, “let’s get out of here,” and she’d go. She would be surprised, but she’d do it.

You’re not wrong about qualification… but that is only one way to undress the pussy.

The way to beat this girl was to appeal to her ego. It was more Judo Game. And she wanted to win, she assumed she would… UUUGGE ego on this one… UUUGEE… and that is exactly why she lost.

>> I would break the interview frame and start interrogating her and my laughs and smiles would be reserved as rewards for her compliance.

This is good game, man. You might have the personal skills to do that. I’m sure it’s possible.

And he does break the interview frame… that is a big part of this. By making it personal. We rarely see interviewees do that to the interviewer.

But imagine a hot, powerful starlet on some late night talk show. When she turns a question around on the interviewer… the interviewer is often surprised. I’ve seen Kimmel, etc., in that kind of moment. Surprise is always a moment where penetration can happen.

In both of the major moments where she backs up… he is making it personal.

I think his time/skill as a in-person psychologist is his asset here. He turns her into a patient. And he has her.

>> still quite safe and respectful compared to how I ‘game’.

I believe you.

Thanks again for bringing your mind here. You’re the kind of guy I want to hear on these topics. You have a lot to share.

Game is about getting the other person to do what you want…to serve your agenda regardless of whether it’s sales, leadership, book promo or seduction. Sometimes it pays to let give the other person the illusion of control, but you are slowly maneuvering them into a favorable position.

Friday afternoon I picked up a girl off the street, and after food and drinks, ended up in her room. I smoked some oil, which I rarely do, got too high and blew it…but upon further reflection realize I self-sabotaged.

I screwed it up because she is a Dominatrix, and I have never been in a situation like that. I have no desire to be dominated, but she was extremely attractive. I didn’t know how to break a woman with this frame, I tried, but it ended up being a frame battle. I lost frame when I let her dictate some things in the present…where we ate and who paid (got hustled).

If I was to get another opportunity at it I would let her have control of thing that are to happen in the future while I maintain leading (physically) in the present.

Or maybe that “Gotcha!” was a good thing, because it puts his frame as the judge and the winner of that duel at the same time. “Gotcha!” affirms his superiority, and calls the Elephant In The Room as Tom Torero calls it (Tom probably stole that name from someone else, but that “technique” is a natural part of human Top Guy communication).

As an interviewee that is also communicating with people at home it was the right thing to do.

But if you’re speaking with a woman that you’re interested in and she’s experiencing some cognitive dissonance let her stew in it. Hold eye-contact with a slight smirk on your face. She’ll seek your approval if you have displayed that you have a strong character and will seek approval.

But that’s just my style, less is more. Speak only when necessary, if you can communicate the same with body language and facial expressions then do that.

I think I am close to what Jordan is saying in the some of the COMMENTS I put in the blog. He overwhelmed her, momentarily, but it was a “bad win” for what Jordan wants, as it came off that she lost, not that she learned anything.

Which I think is very true. He got into her emotions, temporarily… and she loved him for it… temporarily.

And he talks about him being a PSYCHOLOGIST, and how the relationship was patent/counselor -like (my words, not his). I think that is part of why he was able to handle her.

….

And that host is very weird, but he’s a smart guy and asked great questions. Nerdy/good stuff.